- From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
- Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 07:20:24 +0000 (GMT)
- To: www-html@w3.org
> As for my proposal, it differs from Refresh in two significant ways. I don't, unfortunately, have time to write up all my thoughts on this at the moment, but, if one accepts there is a use case for HTML based redirects (as against server side redirects and HTTP mediated client side redirects) and then that there was a case for fragment based redirects, I would suggest that: - user agents be mandated not to redirect based on any element that would not be visible in an unstyled and unscripted interpretation of the document (and as far as possible to extend this to styled and scripted interpretation). This is to ensure that anyone given (or saving) a reference to the whole page for the purpose of accessing a redirected fragment should not just find that the fragment had disappeared (even if the document were viewed in hard copy). This is a result of similar principles to those that require that a client side HTTP mediated redirect should include a payload describing the redirection in human readable terms. It would mean that link was not an acceptable vehicle for such redirections. - it would be necessary to first define the browser history list (back button) mechanism in a generic way (e.g. crawlers won't normally support this function) and then define how successful (no trace on history list) and unsuccessful redirections (the page with the redirection should be made visible by some means or other and possibly any side effects of the page redirected to should be undone).
Received on Thursday, 13 November 2003 02:20:54 UTC